Columbia 2010 Forum

[Helmholtz]

Any more deferrals/rejections in the mail today for ED applicants?

Yes. Got my deferral in the mail today.

Which are of the country do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

[dlf9210]

There's nothing wrong with a minimum # standard, but I'm a firm believer in honesty, and when a school has some sort of cut-off, it should state or at least suggest it in some way. Dropping almost $100 on an app is rather burdensome financially for many students, and an honest statement with regards to # minimums would greatly help in a) reducing the # of apps to those more qualified so the admissions people don't have to deal with 7800 of apps but a more reasonable number and b) allowing prospective applicants to make a more informed decision about whether to spend the time and money involved in an app. I understand that all schools want to encourage applications, often simply to drive their admissions rate down, but that's kind of where the insincerity comes in that makes me so uncomfortable

It seems as though we moved on from this, but I just have to say I agree 100 percent. This is the problem with saying your school is holistic but then having an unpublicized, secretive standard:

Q: Are there cut-off scores to apply to the Law School? What are the median undergraduate GPA and LSAT scores for Columbia Law School students?

A: There is no minimum undergraduate GPA or LSAT score in the consideration process for admission to Columbia Law School. Every complete application is read in full by at least two members of the Admissions Committee.

While we obviously understand that scores are important components, schools sadistically enjoy creating false hope all because:

Why would they want to reduce the number of apps? The more apps they get in each year, the more selective they can appear and the school gets more money from all of those paid application fees.

But let me waste $87 anyway on the basis of this false hope, which instead could buy me a nice Christmas present at Ralph Lauren.

[englawyer]

SLS' median is 171, for starters. So crackberry is a couple points off it. However, I think there is something to be said for people who get into HYS without the numbers for it. In my opinion, those people are far more impressive. Would you rather have started a non-profit or missed 2-3 less questions on a 101 question test? I know what I'd pick.

you may think its obvious..go for the non-profit starter.

but what you should realize is that this introduces a class bias towards the wealthy. top undergrads, starting a non profit, traveling the world, etc. are all opportunities that *typically* come with wealth and connections. starting a non-profit could very well be selfish profile
building, and its a lot easier to raise funds if you "know the right people".

well i am not naive and appreciate the advantages these types would have in their job search and in their life, i am not sure it's best for our society to also give them a boost in elite law school admissions.

[alabamabound]

Any more deferrals/rejections in the mail today for ED applicants?

Yes. Got my deferral in the mail today.

Which are of the country do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

the Los Angeles part.

[SanBun]

There's nothing wrong with a minimum # standard, but I'm a firm believer in honesty, and when a school has some sort of cut-off, it should state or at least suggest it in some way. Dropping almost $100 on an app is rather burdensome financially for many students, and an honest statement with regards to # minimums would greatly help in a) reducing the # of apps to those more qualified so the admissions people don't have to deal with 7800 of apps but a more reasonable number and b) allowing prospective applicants to make a more informed decision about whether to spend the time and money involved in an app. I understand that all schools want to encourage applications, often simply to drive their admissions rate down, but that's kind of where the insincerity comes in that makes me so uncomfortable

It seems as though we moved on from this, but I just have to say I agree 100 percent. This is the problem with saying your school is holistic but then having an unpublicized, secretive standard:

Q: Are there cut-off scores to apply to the Law School? What are the median undergraduate GPA and LSAT scores for Columbia Law School students?

A: There is no minimum undergraduate GPA or LSAT score in the consideration process for admission to Columbia Law School. Every complete application is read in full by at least two members of the Admissions Committee.

While we obviously understand that scores are important components, schools sadistically enjoy creating false hope all because:

Why would they want to reduce the number of apps? The more apps they get in each year, the more selective they can appear and the school gets more money from all of those paid application fees.

But let me waste $87 anyway on the basis of this false hope, which instead could take me shopping at Ralph Lauren.

Exactly. dgb87 was talking about strategic reasons for a partly untruthful portrayal of the admissions process (i.e. stating that there is no minimum LSAT or GPA, and yes I'm aware sometimes exceptional people get in with lower scores but looking at LSN, that has not happened for non-URMs in the past years). dlf 9210 understood my point as it was meant: it's truthfulness, not strategic statements that i'm concerned about.

so yeah, just wanted to agree but it does seem like we moved on from this

EDIT: And YES, I believe that we as people who pay money to have someone read our application are entitled to truthfulness. And YES, I know that this doesn't happen in most instances, but I still believe that it would be the right thing to do on part of the law schools and therefore chose to speak out

[Helmholtz]

Any more deferrals/rejections in the mail today for ED applicants?

Yes. Got my deferral in the mail today.

Which are of the country do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

the Los Angeles part.

Thanks for the reply, brosef. Sorry about the deferral. At this point, I'll feel lucky to get even that.

[fidesverita]

EDIT: And YES, I believe that we as people who pay money to have someone read our application are entitled to truthfulness. And YES, I know that this doesn't happen in most instances, but I still believe that it would be the right thing to do on part of the law schools and therefore chose to speak out

I totally agree. Not because I feel like it'll help me anymore (I'm sure those who benefit from this type of system won't argue with it) but because I think it's fair.

Then again, this is law school. There's a reason why lawyers have such a bad rap.

[APimpNamedSlickback]

in ny, and all quiet on the western front. just sent in some stuff that they wanted on friday. unreasonable to expect awesome news on monday?

[CardinalRules]

in ny, and all quiet on the western front. just sent in some stuff that they wanted on friday. unreasonable to expect awesome news on monday?

If you're RD, yes. If you're ED, no.

[Helmholtz]

in ny, and all quiet on the western front. just sent in some stuff that they wanted on friday. unreasonable to expect awesome news on monday?

Unreasonable to expect it? Probably. Will it happen? Maybe. Who knows. After the first week or two of December, deferrals seemed like they were doled out on a rolling basis last year, as were acceptances and rejections.

[APimpNamedSlickback]

yeah, i'm ED. and i guess "expect" was the wrong word, i was thinking of "within the realm of possibility."

i agree though, things are beginning to look bleak...

[Oban]

haven't got my reject/defer here in california, but expect to soon.

[MetsFan]

last year a few kids got accepted on 12/16 and 12/17

[GlobeTrotter]

From here on, I'll consider each day a victory if I don't receive a deferral.

[kittenmittons]

From here on, I'll consider each day a victory if I don't receive a deferral.

Each day I wake up is a victory

[MetsFan]

oh boy....

[GeePee]

SLS' median is 171, for starters. So crackberry is a couple points off it. However, I think there is something to be said for people who get into HYS without the numbers for it. In my opinion, those people are far more impressive. Would you rather have started a non-profit or missed 2-3 less questions on a 101 question test? I know what I'd pick.

you may think its obvious..go for the non-profit starter.

but what you should realize is that this introduces a class bias towards the wealthy. top undergrads, starting a non profit, traveling the world, etc. are all opportunities that *typically* come with wealth and connections. starting a non-profit could very well be selfish profile
building, and its a lot easier to raise funds if you "know the right people".

well i am not naive and appreciate the advantages these types would have in their job search and in their life, i am not sure it's best for our society to also give them a boost in elite law school admissions.

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

[puppleberry finn]

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

It has also been my experience that people who went to Ivy or top LAC for UG tend to not only get a boost in admissions (albeit small) but also tend to have better softs. There are simply more opportunities for those kind of experiences, more students able to not work full time during school and can thus do after school activities, spend spring break in foreign countries doing aid work, and use their friends and alumni network to have access to post graduation opportunities. Just like everything else, life isn't fair and being wealthy gives you better opportunities at everything. Oh well.

[oneforship]

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

It has also been my experience that people who went to Ivy or top LAC for UG tend to not only get a boost in admissions (albeit small) but also tend to have better softs. There are simply more opportunities for those kind of experiences, more students able to not work full time during school and can thus do after school activities, spend spring break in foreign countries doing aid work, and use their friends and alumni network to have access to post graduation opportunities. Just like everything else, life isn't fair and being wealthy gives you better opportunities at everything. Oh well.

I went to an Ivy, my softs are pretty average/below average, and I'm poor.

[Lmao Zedong]

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

It has also been my experience that people who went to Ivy or top LAC for UG tend to not only get a boost in admissions (albeit small) but also tend to have better softs. There are simply more opportunities for those kind of experiences, more students able to not work full time during school and can thus do after school activities, spend spring break in foreign countries doing aid work, and use their friends and alumni network to have access to post graduation opportunities. Just like everything else, life isn't fair and being wealthy gives you better opportunities at everything. Oh well.

I went to an Ivy, my softs are pretty average/below average, and I'm poor.

for every rule, an exception

[M51]

so if ED people haven't heard by now, is it safe to assume we're getting rejections/WL? I heard they send out acceptances pretty fast at the beginning of december

got asked for a fall grade update this morning...

i don't think my grades will come out until early january...i take this as better than a deferral/rejection though, at least they're still interested. any stats on those who got grade requests in past cycles?

This is a very good thing. My pure speculation says you're mostly in. They just want to make sure you're not totally screwing your semester up. Some ppl even get in still despite lowering their GPA. I remember asking around last year and no one even knew any friends or anything who got that e-mail and didn't eventually get in. So, I'm sure the acceptance %s here are pretty high traditionally.

Also, get ready to wait.... CLS is slow as hell getting back to these ppl apparently. Early January or even mid-January is not unheard of.

edit: any my apt dimensions are just my bedroom... there's also a sizable kitchen, living room, bathroom, etc in the apt share.

[pikalove]

SLS' median is 171, for starters. So crackberry is a couple points off it. However, I think there is something to be said for people who get into HYS without the numbers for it. In my opinion, those people are far more impressive. Would you rather have started a non-profit or missed 2-3 less questions on a 101 question test? I know what I'd pick.

you may think its obvious..go for the non-profit starter.

but what you should realize is that this introduces a class bias towards the wealthy. top undergrads, starting a non profit, traveling the world, etc. are all opportunities that *typically* come with wealth and connections. starting a non-profit could very well be selfish profile
building, and its a lot easier to raise funds if you "know the right people".

well i am not naive and appreciate the advantages these types would have in their job search and in their life, i am not sure it's best for our society to also give them a boost in elite law school admissions.

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

Just want to add my perspective to this discussion...

I founded a non-profit corporation in undergrad and am pretty poor. The registration fee with the government was $300 (which could easily be donated without having serious connections), and was the only start-up money needed. We used pro-bono lawyers for the legal aspect of incorporation, and have exclusively fundraised funds for our initiatives, which have been successful. I'm sure its easier to start a non-profit if you are rich, but its definitely do-able if you aren't - I'm proof of this. I like to think that what I've done is more important than the extra time I could have spent studying for my LSAT or school.

[CardinalRules]

SLS' median is 171, for starters. So crackberry is a couple points off it. However, I think there is something to be said for people who get into HYS without the numbers for it. In my opinion, those people are far more impressive. Would you rather have started a non-profit or missed 2-3 less questions on a 101 question test? I know what I'd pick.

you may think its obvious..go for the non-profit starter.

but what you should realize is that this introduces a class bias towards the wealthy. top undergrads, starting a non profit, traveling the world, etc. are all opportunities that *typically* come with wealth and connections. starting a non-profit could very well be selfish profile
building, and its a lot easier to raise funds if you "know the right people".

well i am not naive and appreciate the advantages these types would have in their job search and in their life, i am not sure it's best for our society to also give them a boost in elite law school admissions.

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

Just want to add my perspective to this discussion...

I founded a non-profit corporation in undergrad and am pretty poor. The registration fee with the government was $300 (which could easily be donated without having serious connections), and was the only start-up money needed. We used pro-bono lawyers for the legal aspect of incorporation, and have exclusively fundraised funds for our initiatives, which have been successful. I'm sure its easier to start a non-profit if you are rich, but its definitely do-able if you aren't - I'm proof of this. I like to think that what I've done is more important than the extra time I could have spent studying .

Outside the very limited law-school-application arena, you're 100% right to think that way. Hats off to you!

[puppleberry finn]

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

It has also been my experience that people who went to Ivy or top LAC for UG tend to not only get a boost in admissions (albeit small) but also tend to have better softs. There are simply more opportunities for those kind of experiences, more students able to not work full time during school and can thus do after school activities, spend spring break in foreign countries doing aid work, and use their friends and alumni network to have access to post graduation opportunities. Just like everything else, life isn't fair and being wealthy gives you better opportunities at everything. Oh well.

I went to an Ivy, my softs are pretty average/below average, and I'm poor.

and I went to a public school and have a fair amount of decent softs. that's why I said "tend" and that they have more opportunities--not that everyone takes advantage of them.

[oneforship]

I think this is completely true. I absolutely would not have the money, the credit, or the capital to help start my own nonprofit out of UG. Even though it seems like a truly enriching and rewarding experience, it just isn't in the cards for me. Likewise, something like Americorps would be equally outside of my reach. So, being poor, I have to rely on the one thing that is truly within my financial reach to get me into law school: the numbers. Sure, one can still have interesting softs that speak about one's other abilities, but some of these softs are not achievable for most.

It has also been my experience that people who went to Ivy or top LAC for UG tend to not only get a boost in admissions (albeit small) but also tend to have better softs. There are simply more opportunities for those kind of experiences, more students able to not work full time during school and can thus do after school activities, spend spring break in foreign countries doing aid work, and use their friends and alumni network to have access to post graduation opportunities. Just like everything else, life isn't fair and being wealthy gives you better opportunities at everything. Oh well.

I went to an Ivy, my softs are pretty average/below average, and I'm poor.

and I went to a public school and have a fair amount of decent softs. that's why I said "tend" and that they have more opportunities--not that everyone takes advantage of them.

I just wanted to be difficult.